Friday, June 28, 2013

Kekejaman dan pembunuhan beramai-ramai oleh kerajaan Myammar

Burma’s Rohingya Muslims Targeted by Buddhist Mob Violence

Muslims from an obscure ethnic group in western Burma have become targets of vicious Buddhist mob attacks. Brendan Brady reports from Rakhine state on the increasing violence.

A woman cries moments after she and other Rohingya Muslims, trying to cross the Naf river into Bangladesh to escape sectarian violence in Burma, were intercepted by Bangladeshi border authorities, June 13, 2012. Bangladesh has refused boatloads of Rohingya Muslims, officials said, despite growing calls by the international community for the border to be opened. (Munir Uz Zaman/AFP/Getty)

As mobs wielding torches and machetes rampaged through his neighborhood, Abdul had a strangely candid encounter with one assailant. Recognizing the man as his long-time neighbor—the same man who had once showed great affection towards Abdul’s children—Abdul yelled to his would-be executioner: "‘Why are you doing this?’ He told me, ‘Sorry, I’m fighting for my people.’” Abdul, whose full name is withheld to protect his identity, is a Muslim from the Rohingya ethnic group and his attacker, a Buddhist. Abdul kept him and other members of the mob at bay by throwing his valuables out of his window onto the street. As they were distracted collecting the cash and jewelry, another group of Buddhists from his street approached his house from the rear. They, too, were armed but they had come to escort Abdul and his family out of the besieged neighborhood. “They saved our lives.”

The conflict in western Burma’s Rakhine State erupted last June, when reports spread that a Buddhist woman was raped and murdered by three Rohingya men. Shortly after, a mob of Buddhists exacted retribution by pulling over a bus carrying Muslims and beating 10 passengers to death. The incidents ignited sectarian violence throughout the state. Nearly 200 were killed and many more injured, and some 10,000 homes were destroyed. The vast majority of the estimated 140,000 displaced were Rohingyas, and a year after their violent upheaval they continue to languish in squalid temporary encampments.

In recent months, the violence spread to include attacks on Muslim communities in other parts of the country. In March, provoked by a small dispute in a Muslim-owned gold shop, a Buddhist mob tore through a town in central Burma, killing over 40 people, burning mosques and Muslim homes, and displacing thousands. In May, 1,200 Muslims in the country’s northeast fled from their homes when throngs of armed Buddhists mobilized after unconfirmed reports that a Muslim man killed a Buddhist woman in the area.

Myanmar Suu Kyi Silence
Agirl and a woman carry bricks from damaged buildings in Sittwe, Rakhine, in western Burma, after long-standing resentment between the Muslim Rohingya and Rakhine Buddhists, two ethnic groups, erupted in bloody fury, June 16, 2012. (Khin Maung Win/AP)

The turmoil carries worrying implications for national reconciliation and the sustainability of democratic reforms in Burma, also known as Myanmar, which is in the first stages of transitioning from military to civilian rule. Since independence, in 1948, Burma’s government has been in alternately hot and cold conflicts with myriad ethnic minority groups in the country’s border regions. The xenophobic generals who seized power by coup in 1962 justified their iron-fisted rule as necessary to hold together a fractured country. The junta stepped down in 2011 and Burma’s new semi-civilian government has carried out surprisingly comprehensive reforms: loosening controls on political association, civil society and the press, as well as releasing hundreds of political prisoners. But fresh sectarian violence serves as fodder to the army’s insistence on remaining a backstop to the fragile civilian government and maintaining ultimate authority. It also raises questions about how far democratic reforms will extend to minorities.

Regarded in many quarters as the most persecuted ethnic group in Asia, the Rohingya live in the borderlands between Burma and Bangladesh but are officially a stateless people. There are around a million Rohingya in Burma today. Their exact roots are debated but many likely settled in Burma in the 19th century, having migrated from modern-day Bangladesh into the newly-acquired lands of the British empire. Today, the Rohingya, along with a few other maligned minorities, are excluded from the 135 ethnic groups Burma’s government recognizes as citizens. Many Burmese say the Rohingya should “go back” to Bangladesh, whose government also disavows the Rohingya. Among other consequences of apartheid policies against them, the Rohingya need special permission to travel and marry and face severe discrimination in access to employment, education, and medical care.

Last year’s violence unveiled particularly chilling dimensions of racial and religious hatred toward the Rohingya. When the wife of Mohamed Salam was found dead floating in a river, her body carried a sinister message. She was abducted along with two of her children in June, and Salam was later told by sympathetic Buddhists how they had died. According to them, her captors said her breasts gave milk to Muslim babies and her womb gave birth to future generations of Muslims. Her breasts were then hacked off and her genitalia mutilated with sharpened bamboo. Her teenage son was tethered to a motorbike and dragged across a rocky road. Salam would not elaborate on how his daughter met her end. Today, he cares for his remaining 5-year-old boy in a camp for displaced people outside of Sittwe, the state capital, and the prospect of receiving justice is even more illusory than his chances of returning to his home and job.

Human Rights Watch alleges last year’s bloodshed amounted to ethnic cleansing. In a detailed report released in April, the international rights monitor said state security forces did more to facilitate than to prevent abuses against the Rohingya, and sometimes even directly participated in atrocities. The group profiled one particularly brutal episode, last October, in which 70 Rohingyas, including 28 children, were left easy prey for a Buddhist mob to butcher after local riot police disarmed the Rohingya of rudimentary weapons they carried to defend themselves. The report said local Buddhist politicians and monks publicly demonized the Rohingya—describing them as a threat to Burmese society and encouraging their removal from the state—“in full view” of authorities,  “who raised no concerns.” Burmese rights groups have criticized Human Rights Watch’s assessment as one-sided, and instead described the violence as “communal.”

A doctor attempts to stanch the bleeding from a gun shot wound to San Shar Aung, a Buddhist Rakhine, in Kyauk Taw township hospital on October 25, 2012 in Kyauk Taw, Burma. Over 20,000 people have been left displaced following violent clashes between Muslim and Buddhist groups in the country which began in June. (Kaung Htet/Getty)

Such labels aside, what may be most foreboding are the dim prospects for a normalization (in relative terms) of life for Rohingyas in Burma. Time has not softened the vitriol many Buddhists in Rakhine State feel towards the group. “We cannot go back to living together,” says Hla Moe Thu, a 58-year-old Buddhist woman living in a camp for displaced people on the outskirts of Sittwe. “They should go to Bangladesh, where they came from, or they should be killed,” she adds, as her grandchild sits beside her. According to Ashin Ariya, the head monk of Shwezedi Monastery in Sittwe, Rohingyas have wicked designs: to rape Buddhist women, colonize Buddhist land, and convert non-Muslims to Islam. “The Muslims like to kill people and rape women, and they want to take over the whole area and make everyone Muslim,” he says matter-of-factly.

Paradoxically, democratic reforms have fed the jingoistic chorus. Over the past year, Burma’s new government has dialed back the heavy press and Internet censorship of the previous military regime, allowing journalists greater independence and web users nearly limitless access to sites. But freedom of speech has unleashed pent-up prejudices. Online forums contain rafts of posts referring to the Rohingya in expletive-filled terms, and Burmese newspapers have shown the Rohingya no quarter. Eleven, one of Burma’s largest-circulation newspapers, has focused its coverage of Rakhine State on slamming the Rohingya. Ho Than Hlaing, their correspondent in Sittwe, says the “Bengalis” living in relief camps are quarrelsome freeloaders who receive better care than displaced Buddhists—in fact, conditions in camps for the much smaller number of displaced Buddhists are markedly better than those in Rohingya camps, some of which are blocked by authorities from receiving international aid. 

When the wife of Mohamed Salam was found dead floating in a river, her body carried a sinister message.

The rhetoric has carried over into daily life. A recently launched campaign urges Burmese to only patronize shops that display “969” signs—a code referring to Buddhist teaching—in their storefronts. The group of zealous monks spearheading the movement allege it is intended to promote Buddhist pride, but its true aim seems to be to marginalize Muslims.

Aung Naing Oo, a member of the Myanmar Peace Center, a governmental group that advises on ethnic disputes, likens the dangerous nationalism in Burma today to the escalation of ethnic tensions in former Yugoslavia after the fall of the Soviet Union: no longer fettered by the strictures of a military state, people are freer to act on long-suppressed prejudices. But even within this scheme, animosity toward the Rohingya is singularly severe. Indeed, they are viewed both as carpet-bagging intruders and low-caste detritus. “Indians”—including various peoples from the subcontinent and those with South Asian features— are resented in Burma because many arrived following the British takeover and soon emerged as a dominant group in urban commerce. Rohingyas are viewed with particular suspicion and scorn for their religion and distinctly dark skin. And, to top it off, they are seen to epitomize the existential threat posed by neighboring Bangladesh, whose large and poor population the Burmese feel is perpetually on the cusp of spilling over en masse into Burma.

The turmoil in Rakhine State is further complicated by hostilities between the local Buddhist population, from the Arakanese ethnic group, and the Burman majority and central government they dominate. The Arakanese were the ancestors of a small kingdom that used to control what is modern-day Rakhine State and, like many ethnic groups in Burma, they desire autonomy. Beyond ethnic pride, the Arakanese resent that Rakhine is Burma’s second-poorest state despite its natural riches – the area’s timber, oil, gas and precious metals have for decades been pillaged by the military and their cronies. “Our people want a real federal state with self-determination and our share of profits from natural resources,” says Than Thun, a community leader in Sittwe. But Arakanese autonomists like Than Thun have, for the time being, found common cause with the central government in directing their ire towards the Rohingya, who are easy scapegoats.

Few figures inside Burma have spoken out against the anti-Rohingya sloganeering. Most conspicuous has been the near silence of the country’s iconic human rights and democracy icon, Aung San Suu Kyi. After 15 years under house arrest, Suu Kyi is now a parliamentarian and has political calculations to consider. Observers believe she sees support for the Rohingya as going treacherously against the tide of popular opinion. The new president, Thein Sein, has said he will crackdown on “political opportunists and religious extremists,” but his intentions and ability to control eruptions of violence remain unclear. Thein Sein is a former high-ranking general who has surprised many in and outside the country with his moderation but that may not extend to his feelings toward the Rohingya. And observers note the upper echelons of his government remain stocked with former military figures who delight in the potential for sectarian violence to steer power back toward the army.

In the meantime, Rohingya in and outside the camps are in greater numbers turning to the sea to escape their dire prospects. Chris Lewa, head of the Arakan Project, an NGO that tracks rights abuses in Rakhine State, estimates that nearly 28,000 Rohingya attempted to flee through the Bay of Bengal during the recent dry season, three times the normal rate. The journey is perilous: hundreds die every year from starvation, dehydration, and drowning aboard barges that are ill-equipped for ocean travel and steered by mercenary crews.

In Boomay—a Rohingya quarter just outside of Sittwe that is hemmed in by a series of army checkpoints—a group of men in a shanty teashop are watching an ancient television tuned to a news channel with footage of Rohingya on barges intercepted by the Bangladeshi navy. The program shows Rohingya kneeling under tarps on the deck of a boat as waves come crashing against the bow. The teashop’s owner pays little attention to scenes of horror—she has already determined her daughter will attempt a similar voyage to join her husband in Malaysia, where he is working illegally but earning steady wages. “If we could stay here in peace and have some freedom, then it would be better to stay here and not take this risk,” says the daughter, who is in her early 20s and plans to take her 5-year-old child along. “But we don’t know if that will ever be the case.”

Saturday, June 15, 2013

Kroni-kroni, setiausaha-setiausaha dan penasihat-penasihat Najib patut dipecat - Tun Daim

MONDAY, MAY 27, 2013

Incorrect Strategy Cost BN Votes

TWICE the Finance Minster of Malaysia and now a sought after political commentator, Tun Daim Zainuddin, attributed the Barisan Nasional’s poor showing at the May 5 general polls to incorrect strategy.

He told the China Press newspaper that Malaysia’ general elections is a parliamentary election and not a presidential election, adding that Prime Minister Mohd Najib Abdul Razak’s advisors should be sacked.

“If you associate a vote for BN as a vote for him (Mohd Najib), then BN’s poorer results reflect on him too.

“This is a parliamentary election, not a presidential election. The PM's advisors should be sacked.” he said.

And is Mohd Najib a lame duck Prime Minister and Umno President?

The following is the English transcript of the interview, which covered a wide variety of issues surrounding the outcome of the 13th GE, made available to this blog. I record my appreciation to the China Press for its superb effort and to Tun Daim’s office.

The Day After

1. Tun, what was first in your mind when you first received the full election result? Did you expect it?

I wasn't surprised.  At around 12noon the feedback I got was that - BN 141, DAP 38 butmy own assessment was BN between 125 and 135 only.

2. Do you think this election was a fair one? Opposition parties and NGOs still accused BN of misuse the government facilities, and the problematic integrity of the electoral roll.

Of course it is fair. If its not fair how come in Penang and Selangor Pakatan improved on majorities and Federal BN get only 133. These accusations are not new. They said all these even before the elections. I’ve said earlier that they will be saying all these because they know they can't get to Putrajaya.

Read my interviews before this, I said they will be proclaiming to  the world they would win and that if they don’t its because they have been robbed and therefore entitled to protest, incite people which is what they are doing now and they want people to go to streets. They want FRUs, water cannons and teargas then CNN, Al Jazeera etc will be back and they are back in the news.

Anwar and Kit Siang are inviting police to arrest them. They want to be arrested. They are totally irresponsible. If you see the recent rallies and that majority of the participants are Chinese, what do you think will happen if one hot-headed Malay organisation wants to organise a counter rally? But Anwar and Kit Siang don't mind, if there is another interracial incident, they would blame BN.  If you are willing to sacrifice peace and stability for your ends, what kind of leadership is this?

They say they should be the rightful leaders of this country, yet they defy laws, defy the police, and they have no respect for, and undermine every institutions of government which they say they should helm. What kind of leadership promotes lawlessness and anarchy? What message do you send and what lessons do you teach the young and the impressionable? Leadership comes with responsibility.

There are laws in this country. Go to court, of course, they say courts are not fair, yet these same courts have acquitted Anwar. Again when it’s convenient to them they go to the courts to sue and silence their detractors. They accept where they won and reject where they lost.  They are selective. Karpal practices and appeals before this same Court.

Be brave and honest. Accept the results. Karpal says he is happy with the results. PAS has accepted. Azmin is critical of Anwar’s refusal to accept the results and doing these rallies, but don't read too much into his statements. It’s like an old married couple’s quarrel, one party merajuk (sulks) but in the end they are still together.

Anwar is already up to his tricks - putting out feelers to Barisan MPs. He is waiting after the Cabinet appointments for another round of his Sept 16.

Reasons for Poor BN Performance

3. As expected in our last interview, BN managed to retain Putrajaya but couldn't regain the two-third majority. What are the main reasons?

Really you should ask BN. But in my opinion, it’s the wrong strategy. As I’ve said before, this is a parliamentary election, not a presidential election. The PM's advisors should be sacked. If you associate a vote for BN as a vote for him, then BN poorer results reflects on him too.  I kept reminding them that those huge numbers at BN’s ceramahs do not translate into votes. You don’t try to fight his (Anwar’s) numbers with your even bigger numbers. Let Anwar be the entertainer (borrowing from The Financial Times). We are not entertainers, we don’t know how to sing, dance and tell jokes. It’s a serious business electing a government, so lets leave this clown’s strategy alone and not play to his game.

 If I know, then surely BN knows that the Chinese majority areas were gone. Why waste time and money? As a strategy, you should concentrate on those areas where you lost by slim majorities in 2008 and strengthen the seats you won in 2008. There was also the question of choice of candidates, and for example in Pandan, why be petty?

Many people disputed that there was a Chinese tsunami.  But there was, in the sense that Chinese voters voted en block whilst non-Chinese votes were split; but this is their right. This is democracy.

What was disturbing was the reason for the en block votes. Pakatan preached hatred for BN particularly UMNO. DAP have always told the Chinese that they are victims, marginalised; that the cup they have is always half empty; that this is the time to teach MCA and Gerakan a lesson for being under UMNO’s control, that UMNO (and by extension the Malays) were dominant, and this was a Malay-led government, and the Chinese by voting out all the Chinese parties in BN is saying that they have had enough of being bullied by UMNO/ Malays. If this is not racist, I don’t know what is.

Their cybertroopers were at work, 24 hours a day, sending misinformation, spins, rumours, lies, untruths etc. Where were the Banglas? Where was the blackout? How many peoplewhose ink washed off, voted twice? Tun M flew away in a private jet? Lies and lies and the Chinese believe in "ubah" and "Ini kali lah".

I told you if the Chinese rejected Najib's leadership, the rural votes will swing to BN. DAP benefited the most. PAS, I do not know how it is going to reorganise itself. PKR we know practice nepotism, ask Azmin.

As for the Indian votes, only some Indians votes came back to BN. Koh Tsu Koon has announced his retirement. Chua Soi Lek is not seeking re-election. In the West you lose, you retire. Brown retired. Here they are not morally strong to quit. Anwar stays on, Kit Siang stays on, Hadi stays on. Let me remind you, Anwar said he would retire if he failed to get to Putrajaya. Anwar does not keep to his word. He will never retire, until the day he is on his deathbed he would still want to be PM.

Let’s recognize that nowhere in the world is it easy to get a two-third majority. Urban voters everywhere in the world are anti-government. BN's strength lies in the rural areas. Yet too much time and money were wasted in urban areas where the results were almost certain.

4. Chinese votes for opposition even reached over 90%, why? From your observation, why MCA and Gerakan rejected by the Chinese? We still remember in 2004 the situation was totally different.

I have explained at length in the answer above. Chinese votes for the Pakatan reached 90% because they believed in Pakatan’s propaganda. This is at last the chance to reject the Malay-led BN.  We saw on polling day many Chinese came out in droves believing that Pakatan was going to win. They were all misled. Pakatan knew that they were not going to get the numbers. Imagine Chinese voting for PAS, when they have seen what was happening in Kedah and Kelantan. Chinese voters were taken for a ride that they were going to make the difference. If Hindraf can affect the 2008 results, imagine what the Chinese with their bigger number can do? This was the line given and they swallowed it. In 2004, Chinese gave the then PM with his clean image a chance but that got to BN’s head and 2008 was the result. In 2013, Pakatan tapped into the Chinese and urban psyche. The Chinese are practical people and if they felt that the votes could go either way, they would not take a chance and choose stability over change; but if they believed that they can change the Government and win, then they did what you see in GE13. But Chinese normally bet on minority horse.

5. By analysing the results, we can see DAP won more seats this time and seats won by PKR and PAS also close to their numbers in 2008. Does it mean Malay votes still split? How about Indian votes?

Malay votes split 4 ways. UMNO, PAS, Keadilan and fence sitters. Lucky for BN, this time most went to UMNO. Less than 50% of Indian voters voted BN.

People’s Real Concerns

6. Why the 1Malaysia plans, ETP, transformation plans did not work and caused BN a bigger loss?

I don't think people reject 1Malaysia, ETP etc. The issues were not these. In all my earlier interviews I had listed the rakyat’s concern. These were and still are 1) corruption 2) good governance 3) security 4) education 5) inflation 6) urban poor 7) young graduates. Government instead focused on giving handouts. You give dinner once, people thank you. Give them five times and they think you are trying to buy their votes.

7. Even though you have given your warning, but the so-called Chinese Tsunami was so big to be stopped. But, is it fair to blame the Chinese for BN's not so good victory?

I have explained the Chinese tsunami. Of course, Pakatan have to say it is not Chinese tsunami, otherwise they will be held responsible for this racial divide. Are they denying the Chinese voted en block and Malay votes were split? No one is blaming the Chinese, but this what it is.  As I said they were misled and they voted Pakatan but again it is their right to buy into that argument and voted to kick the BN out.

8. How to change their minds or should BN given up Chinese by promoting the Ketuanan Melayu sprit to rely more on the support of Malays?

You can always try and you must try to change their minds. You cannot give up on nearly 30% of your fellow citizens. But you have to address issues as in my answer to Question 6.

Ketuanan Melayu was when the Malays fought against Malayan Union. Ketuanan Melayu was in the Federation of Malaya Agreement of 1948.  After 1957 and later in 1963, there is constitutional Malaysia. All races have accepted the Constitution. It is a fine and well-balanced document.  Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore too had accepted this document. The Constitution protects all citizens. We are all Malaysians. As I said, I'm born a Malay, you are born a Chinese. We don't chose to be Malay or Chinese, but you and I choose to be Malaysians. That is our choice. If I don't like to be a Malaysian, I can choose to be something else also. So let us stay united and work hard and sincerely and make sure the country continues to prosper in peace.

9. Najib has offered a “reconciliation" plan. How serious is he? In addition, if this plan is necessary, how should Najib deal with it?

I am glad he offered reconciliation. He must be serious. You don't make statements you don't mean. You are a leader. But I read Pakatan has rejected his overtures, they talk about unity but do not practice it. Instead they offer preset conditions.  Are they sincere?  As leaders, the country must come first.

10. How is this so-called process of reconciliation ever going to take place when chauvinists and radicals still there to give their provoking remarks?

We, the rakyat must reject the chauvinists and the radicals. Government must take action against them. Rakyat must show support against these people. Country must come first. Whatever you may think about the Malays, they have shown that they reject extremists. They rejected Perkasa, Ibrahim Ali and Zulkifly Nordin.

Najib A Lame Duck PM?

11. Some people say Najib is a lame duck Prime Minister, he has not only has to think of how to regain the support of non-Malays but has to guard against the wolves in his party. Will he encounter any problem when party election takes place this year?

I have retired. I don't know the mood is in the party. He has to explain to party members what went wrong. Is he going to be a lame duck PM? Cameron in UK, Gilliard in Australia, Mohan Singh in India so far are ok even though in their cases they are ruling on razor thin majority.

UMNO has to remain united if it wants to get the support of Malays. Strengthen your rural support and the rest of the Malays will respect UMNO. If he explains to UMNO what went wrong then I think UMNO will accept and offer their support. It will take a bit of time with the Divisions and he has to make sure they continue to support him and he has to tell UMNO members that only UMNO is their saviour. I believe UMNO members will give him another chance. Those disloyal, you must punish them. But prove with evidence.  You have the Opposition to deal with you don’t need enemies in the blanket.  You don’t need over 3 millions members if they did not work or vote for you. It is better to have a smaller but committed membership who love the party and want what is best of it. For far too long, UMNO has had members who placed self-interest above the party.

12. Please analyse the result for Selangor. Far from what we expected, BN lost more seats and more popular votes this time despite of thousand good efforts had been put?

Selangor was a disaster. When I got feedback on the problems on the ground, I sent many messages to the leadership. I spoke to Zain (Mohd Zain Mohamed, the BN Selangor Election Director). He assured me of victory, totally ignoring the voices on the ground. His own Ketua Pemuda stood against him and so many ketua bahagians campaigned against him.

I think Zain was a wrong  choice. He was dropped from Cabinet by Najib because obviously he didn’t think much of his ability and then you appoint him as Selangor UMNO Secretary. I don't understand Najib’s logic. When you all asked me at the last interview, I said there were problems of wrong candidates. Ketua Bahagians’ were not happy. Among UMNO (members) sabotage was everywhere. I told Zain a list of state seats that were in trouble. Zain said yes a bit of problem but BN would win. In all those seats that were in my list, BN lost. With wrong candidates not going to the ground, ignoring divisional chiefs, not visiting your members and voters, sabotage, you couldn't win.

When I was in Negeri Sembilan campaigning on Friday night, I got a message that Bukit Selambau state seat under the Merbok Parlimentary seat was in trouble.  I got back to KL at 2 am and a few hours later, early on Saturday morning, I flew to Kedah. They were still quarrelling about the state candidate, even when it’s one day before polling. I told them they were crazy. Just vote BN. Told them they had half a day left to campaign and go together and campaign and be seen to be united. They lost by 500 votes because they closed their pondok panas by 4pm, confident that they had won. I smsed you by noon that BN won Merbok but the Indians there have to quarrel even at the last minute about candidates and we lost. We are our own worst enemies.

13. As well as in Penang. Before 5 May, BN seemed to have some hope as the 1Malaysia welfare group had organized many free dinners around Penang and free concert. They tried to attract the voters with money and presents. But, all effort proved useless. Why?

These people are amateurs. They are silly people. They think they are clever and throw money around. Better give to charity. Why BN allowed stupid events like these? People are insulted because they knew you thought they could be bought with money, concerts and dinners.  So they came to relax, have free makan and  be entertained. This is an election. It’s a serious matter. Let Anwar be the entertainer.

(China Press)

Friday, June 14, 2013

PKR disputes Baram parliamentary win by Anyi

PKR fail petisyen keputusan Baram

by Rosemaria Buma. Borneo Post June 13, 2013, Thursday
MIRI: Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) merupakan pihak pertama dari Pakatan Rakyat (PR) di Sarawak yang memfailkan petisyen untuk mengisytiharkan keputusan Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-13 (PRU13) bagi kerusi Parlimen P.220 Baram sebagai tidak sah dan batal.
Pengerusi PKR Negeri Baru Bian berkata, petisyen itu telah difailkan di Mahkamah Tinggi Miri di sini petang semalam.
Katanya, dalam petisyen itu, pempetisyen Roland Engan yang merupakan calon PKR bagi kerusi Parlimen P.220 Baram pada PRU13 lalu telah menamakan calon Barisan Nasional (BN) yang kini Ahli Parlimen Baram, Anyi Ngau sebagai responden pertama dan Pegawai Pengurus Pilihan Raya Umum P.220 Baram, Joseph Belayong Punan yang juga Pegawai Daerah Marudi selaku responden kedua.
Menurut beliau, pertisyen itu difailkan bagi memohon perintah mahkamah untuk mengisytiharkan keputusan PRU13 di kerusi Parlimen Baram sebagai tidak sah dan batal mengikut Seksyen 35 (b) dan (c) Akta Kesalahan Pilihan Raya 1954 dengan mengemukakan lapan alasan.
Antaranya, timbul keraguan pada keputusan undi pos dan undi awal; melucutkan hak mengundi beberapa pengundi sah di Kampung Long Item, Kampung Long Lilim dan Kampung Long Miri.
Selain itu, pihak responden juga didakwa gagal mematuhi beberapa peraturan pilihan raya semasa dan selepas proses pengiraan undi dilakukan.
“Justeru kami (PKR) berharap keputusan yang baik akan berpihak kepada PKR kerana kami mempunyai beberapa alasan dan bukti yang kukuh dalam petisyen ini,” katanya pada sidang media di pekarangan Kompleks Mahkamah Miri di sini, semalam.
Katanya, dalam petisyen itu, Roland telah melantik beliau sendiri dan See Chee How selaku Naib Pengerusi PKR Negeri sebagai peguam bela untuk mewakilinya.
Ditanya adakah PKR akan mengemukakan petisyen serupa untuk kawasan Parlimen Saratok, Baru menjawab pada peringkat awal mereka memang berhasrat berbuat demikian.
Namun katanya setelah menimbangkan keseluruhan faktor dan bukti, mereka membuat keputusan untuk memberi lebih tumpuan kepada kerusi Parlimen Baram untuk difailkan petisyen.
“PKR Baram merupakan pihak pertama dari Pakatan Rakyat (PR) di negeri ini yang memfailkan petisyen PRU13 dan yang kedua di Sarawak selepas BN memfailkan petisyen serupa di Sarikei kelmarin,” ujar beliau lanjut.
PRU13 lalu menyaksikan pertandingan tiga penjuru di kerusi Parlimen P.220 Baram iaitu antara calon BN Anyi Ngau, Patrick Sibat (Bebas) dan Roland dari PKR.
Keputusan memihak kepada Anyi yang memperolehi sebanyak 9,182 undi sekali gus menewaskan Patrick Sibat (363) dan Roland (8,988), dengan majoriti undi 194.

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Tiong Thai King letak jawatan mengejut sebagai Datuk Bandar SIbu

Tiong quits as SMC chairman

Borneo Post June 13, 2013, Thursday
SIBU: Datuk Tiong Thai King, who failed to defend Lanang in the May 5 general election, has resigned as chairman of Sibu Municipal Council.
A reliable source disclosed that Tiong submitted his resignation letter last week before leaving for a holiday.
The source said his resignation letter was handed to Minister of Local Government and Community Development Dato Sri Wong Soon Koh.
The source did not mention the reason for Tiong’s decision.
Reporters had been calling him for confirmation, but to no avail.
In the recent 13th general election, Tiong was involved in a straight fight with Alice Lau Khiong Yieng of the DAP. Lau won when she garnered 26,613 votes to win by a 8,630-vote majority.
After the results were announced, speculations were rife that Tiong would resign from his post as chairman of SMC.
He was appointed SMC chief when the late Datuk Robert Lau was appointed a deputy transport minister.
Over the years, Tiong had been helping in social development, community building, development of Chinese and mission schools, and sports and recreational development here.

Monday, June 10, 2013

Airasia X IPO

Penghalangan penerbangan antarabangsa terus ke Sarawak oleh Kementerian Pengangkutan menambat industri pelancongan Sarawak

Let MAS fly on its own

Borneo Post June 9, 2013, Sunday
YUMMY: Nazri (second right) sampling ‘keropok lekor’ during his visit to Medan Niaga Satok while Abang Johari (right) looks on. — Photo by Muhammad Rais Sanusi
Special protection for national airline needs to go as Sarawak, Sabah need direct international flights
KUCHING: The special protection given to Malaysia Airlines (MAS) ought to be lifted to pave the way for Sarawak and Sabah to have more direct international fl ights to spur their tourism industry.
Minister of Tourism and Culture Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz said his ministry would talk to the Ministry of Transport as soon as possible to address this perennial issue.
“Now is no longer the time to protect our national carrier. We should focus on the tourism industry which is one of the biggest money earners from the infl ow of tourists,” he told reporters at the Federal Agriculture and Marketing Authority (Fama) building at Medan Niaga Satok yesterday.
Nazri said he was aware that state leaders had pleaded for direct international fl ights for years but all fell on deaf ears due to the special protection given to MAS.
He opined that MAS had been around the past 50 years and thus it was high time the government shifted its priorities and push for more direct international fl ights to states such as Sarawak and Sabah which have strong tourism potentials.
“The modern world is fast becoming a global village, and this will increase competition in all sectors.  This, thus, makes it senseless to protect a single national airline carrier.
“We have to be open and competitive.  If our airline is unable to compete, that is too bad.”
Nazri said he believed that if the Pan Borneo Highway materialised it would open up even more opportunities for Sarawak to tap its tourism industry.
On tourist arrivals for this year, he said his ministry expected 26.7 million tourists to visit Malaysia, with tourism receipts totalling RM63 billion.
Sarawak is expected to draw in 4.2 million tourists this year.
Nazri said both figures were expected to increase next year as it would be Visit Malaysia Year.
“Next year, we are projecting 28 million tourists in Malaysia, 4.5 million of them visiting Sarawak to produce a tourism receipt of RM67 billion.”
Meanwhile, Nazri, who cruised along Sarawak River to Medan Niaga Satok from the Borneo Convention Centre Kuching (BCCK), praised the state government for beautifying and developing its river banks.
“The idea of building convention centres and hotels next to the Sarawak River is absolutely brilliant,” he said, adding that rivers are a sustainable tourism product.
To support the state government’s effort in promoting river taxis, Nazri said his ministry would seek funds to build a bridge linking BCCK to the adjacent boat jetty which is located some 200 meters away.
“I was told that the estimated price to build this covered walkway is RM5.6 million. The project is relevant as we do not want delegates or visitors to walk in the harsh sun or rain to get to the jetty.”
Accompanying Nazri was Minister of Tourism Datuk Amar Abang Johari Tun Openg, who said that having direct international fl ights would augur well for the state in particular and the nation in general.
“We have the infrastructure … better than the ones in Bali. If they (Bali) can do it, so can we,” enthused Abang Johari.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Tan Sri James Masing : Tak perlu Jawatankuasa khas untuk SPR

Najib: Parliamentary committee to oversee Election Commission

Najib: Parliamentary committee to oversee Election Commission
KUALA LUMPUR: A bipartisan special Parliamentary committee comprising MPs from both the Barisan Nasional and Opposition will be set up to oversee the Election Commission(EC), in efforts to revive confidence in the institution.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today announced this during his speech earlier today in conjunction with the Yang di-Pertuan’s birthday celebration at Istana Negara.

“The government has decided to transfer the control and functions of the EC to a special committee consisting of MPs from all political parties either from the government or the Opposition,” said Najib.

“Eventhough the 13th General Election was smooth and well, the government will give cooperate with EC to upgrade the credibility of the elections in the country.

“Do not allow those with self interests to destroy the credibility of this institution with wild perceptions,” he added.

“With this move, it is hoped that the impartiality of the Election Commission is no longer questioned and that the confidence of the people towards the Commission can be strengthened,” he was quoted by Bernama as saying.

Naib stressed that the EC was  not an agency or a government department, but was a mechanism that was formed under the highest law of the land, the Federal Constitution.

The EC, formed in 1957 under the Federal Constitution, has always reported to the Prime Minister’s Department.

Following the 13th General Election on May 5, Pakatan Rakyat has accused the commission of biasness towards the incumbent BN.

Pakatan has been holding massive rallies dubbed ‘blackout505’ questioning the credibility of the EC and alleged that the election was wrought with fraud.

Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim went as far as saying that the coalition that he leads had won GE13 but victory was “stolen” from them.

A point often highlighted was that BN had lost the popular vote for the first time since 1969, receiving some 47% of popular votes against Pakatan’s 51 per cent.

BN won 133 seats in the 222-member Dewan Rakyat while the opposition 89.

PKR has announced that 41 election petitions will be filed in 222 federal constituencies. Three by the DAP, 20 by PKR and 18 by PAS. It claimed that it has enough evidence on phantom voters and power outages that affected the result of the polls.

Barisan Nasional has announced that it would be filing 50 election petitions.

The announcement has already drawn responses by BN and Pakatan politicians on twitter:

Tak perlu jawatankuasa ganti SPR, kata Masing

Borneo Post on June 4, 2013, Tuesday
KUCHING: Menteri Kanan Negeri Tan Sri James Masing menyifatkan penubuhan jawatankuasa khas untuk mengambil alih kawal selia dan fungsi Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) hanya tindakan yang membazir masa dan wang.
Beliau berkata penubuhan jawatankuasa khas itu tidak perlu memandangkan ia telah dilakukan sebelum Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-13 (SPR) yang lalu.
Presiden Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) itu juga berkata kerajaan tidak boleh terlalu mengikut kehendak pembangkang kerana mereka akan sentiasa merungut dan tidak berpuas hati selagi belum berjaya menguasai Putrajaya.
“Kenapa perlu ia dilakukan semula? Ia hanya membazir masa dan wang! Pembangkang akan sentiasa merungut dan tidak berpuas hati selagi mereka belum berjaya menguasai Putrajaya,” ujarnya.
Beliau berkata demikian sebagai mengulas kenyataan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak berhubung penubuhan jawatankuasa khas Parlimen kedua-dua parti untuk menyelia SPR.
Najib menjelaskan penubuhan jawatankuasa khas itu yang diwakili Ahli Parlimen daripada semua parti politik sama ada kerajaan atau pembangkang bertujuan memperkukuhkan lagi kewibaan dan kredibiliti badan berkenaan.
Beliau berkata demikian dalam ucapan sembah tahniahnya kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Abdul Halim Mu’adzam Shah sempena Hari Keputeraan Seri Paduka dan Istiadat Pengurniaan Darjah Kebesaran, Bintang dan Pingat Persekutuan di Istana Negara Sabtu lepas.
SPR menjadi sasaran dalam mengendalikan PRU13 apabila didakwa bersekongkol dengan BN bagi membolehkan parti kerajaan itu memenangi pilihan raya walaupun tewas undi majoriti kepada PR sebanyak 49 peratus.
BN memperolehi 133 kerusi manakala PR memperolehi 89 kerusi Parlimen dengan 51 peratus undi popular.
Sementara itu Pengerusi Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Sarawak Baru Bian berkata pihaknya menyambut baik pengumuman Najib itu tetapi dengan dua syarat iaitu pertama pengerusi SPR dan timbalannya harus meletak jawatan, kedua jawatankuasa khas itu mesti diketuai oleh wakil pembangkang.
“Kita bersetuju dengan dua sebab, iaitu pengerusi SPR (Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof) dan timbalan pengerusi SPR (Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar) letak jawatan.
“Pelantikan pengerusi SPR yang baharu mesti dilakukan menerusi rundingan dengan Pakatan Rakyat.
“Kedua, jawatankuasa khas ini mesti diketuai oleh wakil daripada pembangkang,” tegas Baru yang juga Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN ) Ba’Kelalan.